Return-Path: Received: from smtp7.gateway.net ([208.230.117.251]) by ns1.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-64832U3500L350S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 21:53:53 -0500 Received: from oemcomputer (1Cust19.tnt2.coeur-dalene.id.da.uu.net [63.20.49.19]) by smtp7.gateway.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA23665 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 21:50:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001f01bf99f3$c1cfffc0$1331143f@oemcomputer> Reply-To: "dfs" From: "dfs" To: "Lancair List" Subject: LC235 Header Tank outlets Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 18:57:36 -0800 X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Mime-Version: 1.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Re: Ed Sikora's queation about why two outlets on the header tank. I asked the same question many years ago so it took a while for what I remember to come to the surface (S'trouble with getting old, the CRS syndrome will be with you - sorta like "The Force" - like it or not). As I understand it, should you ever find yourself running on just the dregs of fuel in the header, attitude and/or G-forces will push the fuel forward or aft in the tank hopefully covering at least one of the ports. Fuel being heavier than air, it will fill the fuel line to the gascolator and hence, the pump. Good theory, I guess, however I never allow my header to get so low that maneuvering (sp?) could possibly create a problem. Once my wing tanks are empty and I've used a few gallons from the header, my rule is that I'm in the terminal area ready to get on the ground. IMHO, you should use the two port design, just in case. Dan Schaefer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LML website: http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html Builders' Bookstore: http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>